César Esteves1,2,3, Celestino Neves4,5,6, Luís Augusto7, Joana Menezes4,5,6, Josué Pereira8, Irene Bernardes7, José Fonseca7, Davide Carvalho4,5,6. 1. Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Centro Hospitalar São João, Porto, Portugal. cme1983@gmail.com. 2. Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal. cme1983@gmail.com. 3. Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal. cme1983@gmail.com. 4. Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Centro Hospitalar São João, Porto, Portugal. 5. Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal. 6. Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal. 7. Department of Neuroradiology, Centro Hospitalar São João, Porto, Portugal. 8. Department of Neurosurgery, Centro Hospitalar São João, Porto, Portugal.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Most pituitary lesions are detected during the investigation of symptoms associated with hormonal dysfunction and vision abnormalities. When the lesion is identified in an image performed for reasons not related to the tumor, the term incidentaloma applies. Our aim was to describe the diagnosis behind pituitary incidentalomas, patient characteristics and their follow up. METHODS: We searched for the terms "pituitary", "hypophysis" and "incidentaloma" in the requisitions and reports of all CTs and MRIs performed between 1st September 2008 and 30th October 2013. We retrieved demographic data as well as information regarding presentation and follow-up. RESULTS: We detected 71 pituitary incidentalomas, 3 in children/adolescents. In adult patients, mean age was 51.6 ± 18.46 years and 42 were female (61.8 %). The most frequent reason for imaging was headache (33.8 %). The image that first detected the incidentaloma was CT scan in 63.2 and 17.6 % patients presented symptoms that could have led to earlier diagnosis. Pituitary adenoma is the most prevalent lesion (n 48; 70.6 %), followed by Rathke's cleft cyst (n 9; 13.2 %). Hormonal evaluation revealed hypopituitarism in 14 patients and hypersecretion in 6: 5 prolactinomas and 1 somatotroph adenoma. Twenty-one (28.8 %) patients underwent surgery and there was no malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: In concordance with available literature, adenomas are the most frequent incidentally found pituitary lesions. Hormonal dysfunction is quite prevalent, including symptomatic presentations, which suggests that there seems to be a low sensitivity for the diagnosis of pituitary disease.
PURPOSE: Most pituitary lesions are detected during the investigation of symptoms associated with hormonal dysfunction and vision abnormalities. When the lesion is identified in an image performed for reasons not related to the tumor, the term incidentaloma applies. Our aim was to describe the diagnosis behind pituitary incidentalomas, patient characteristics and their follow up. METHODS: We searched for the terms "pituitary", "hypophysis" and "incidentaloma" in the requisitions and reports of all CTs and MRIs performed between 1st September 2008 and 30th October 2013. We retrieved demographic data as well as information regarding presentation and follow-up. RESULTS: We detected 71 pituitary incidentalomas, 3 in children/adolescents. In adult patients, mean age was 51.6 ± 18.46 years and 42 were female (61.8 %). The most frequent reason for imaging was headache (33.8 %). The image that first detected the incidentaloma was CT scan in 63.2 and 17.6 % patients presented symptoms that could have led to earlier diagnosis. Pituitary adenoma is the most prevalent lesion (n 48; 70.6 %), followed by Rathke's cleft cyst (n 9; 13.2 %). Hormonal evaluation revealed hypopituitarism in 14 patients and hypersecretion in 6: 5 prolactinomas and 1 somatotroph adenoma. Twenty-one (28.8 %) patients underwent surgery and there was no malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: In concordance with available literature, adenomas are the most frequent incidentally found pituitary lesions. Hormonal dysfunction is quite prevalent, including symptomatic presentations, which suggests that there seems to be a low sensitivity for the diagnosis of pituitary disease.
Authors: Meike W Vernooij; M Arfan Ikram; Hervé L Tanghe; Arnaud J P E Vincent; Albert Hofman; Gabriel P Krestin; Wiro J Niessen; Monique M B Breteler; Aad van der Lugt Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-11-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: O M Dekkers; S Hammer; R J W de Keizer; F Roelfsema; P J Schutte; J W A Smit; J A Romijn; A M Pereira Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: N Karavitaki; K Collison; J Halliday; J V Byrne; P Price; S Cudlip; J A H Wass Journal: Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) Date: 2007-08-13 Impact factor: 3.478
Authors: I Kreitschmann-Andermahr; S Siegel; R Weber Carneiro; J M Maubach; B Harbeck; G Brabant Journal: Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) Date: 2013-09-20 Impact factor: 3.478
Authors: Pamela U Freda; Albert M Beckers; Laurence Katznelson; Mark E Molitch; Victor M Montori; Kalmon D Post; Mary Lee Vance Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Timothy J Steiner; Lars Jacob Stovner; Zaza Katsarava; Jose Miguel Lainez; Christian Lampl; Michel Lantéri-Minet; Daiva Rastenyte; Elena Ruiz de la Torre; Cristina Tassorelli; Jessica Barré; Colette Andrée Journal: J Headache Pain Date: 2014-05-21 Impact factor: 7.277
Authors: Pamela U Freda; Jeffrey N Bruce; Alexander G Khandji; Zhezhen Jin; Richard A Hickman; Emily Frey; Carlos Reyes-Vidal; Marc Otten; Sharon L Wardlaw; Kalmon D Post Journal: J Endocr Soc Date: 2020-02-18
Authors: Nadine M Vaninetti; David B Clarke; Deborah A Zwicker; Churn-Ern Yip; Barna Tugwell; Steve Doucette; Chris Theriault; Khaled Aldahmani; Syed Ali Imran Journal: Endocr Connect Date: 2018-04-30 Impact factor: 3.335